15 October 2017 1:37 AM

'Run! Hide! Tell!' Try saying that to Churchill and Nelson

This is Peter Hitchens's Mail on Sunday column

If you had asked me for a national watchword in my childhood, it would have been along the lines of: 'Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more, or close the wall up with our English dead,' or perhaps: 'We shall fight on the beaches,' or possibly: 'England expects that every man will do his duty.'

I suppose, with a sigh, that such things have now passed out of the national mind.

But how miserable that the motto we are now being advised to adopt, when under terrorist attack, is the ghastly police advice of 'Run! Hide! Tell!'

Not only do I feel faintly nauseated by the suggestion that I should run and hide when confronted by evil (I may actually do so, but I will be ashamed of myself if I do) but I also think it is bad advice.

At times of great danger, what you need most of all is calm. It makes you more use, and it stops you infecting other people with panic, or of being infected by it.

I was worried by one recent episode of real terror when a schoolboy was injured not by the bomb but by the crowd fleeing afterwards.

Did this really fit with our self-congratulation about the Blitz spirit prevailing yet again?

Possibly, calm may even give you the resolve needed to hit back. When authority is squawking at you to run away, it is hard to be calm.

Panic leads to stampedes, and quite often to greater danger than you already face.

Don't we still, in fact, admire those who hit or grab or trip up terrorists, rather than fleeing from them?

Won't we be safer if terrorists know that we might stand up to them? And is headlong flight wise?

If fire breaks out in a building, are we told to run? On the contrary, we are urged to leave in an orderly way.

I was struck by the report in this newspaper of what happened last weekend in London when a car roared into crowds outside the Natural History Museum. We now know this was an accident.

People nearby, quite reasonably, reacted as if it might be terrorism. And they didn't run and hide, to their great credit.

The driver was seized and held before police arrived. Then, one witness recounted: 'The police charged at us shouting, 'Get out of here! Run and don't stop running.'

These police obviously thought the threat had escalated. People started running for their lives.'

Another described how 'there were all these people on Exhibition Road running… people were just panicking and running'.

I am still wondering how much this panicking and running were caused not by the incident, but by the shouted police advice to flee.

You might say that there could have been a bomb, but there wasn't. People could also have been badly hurt in the panic.

We have to get this into proportion, and we have to remember that terrorism is called 'terrorism' because its whole aim is to scare us.

Terror will always surprise us, and it is horrible, but actually it does a very small amount of damage compared with conventional war.

It will not destroy our economy or starve us to death. It only wins if it forces us to change our way of life out of fear of it. We should not do so.

Snap that defines our fake nation

Why is this picture of a Life Guard with a wire in his ear so upsetting? I think it is because of the contrast between the 18th Century grandeur of the uniform and the dreary modern banality of the headphones, and the noise trickling through them. By the way, I have checked and it is definitely not some clever new military gadget. Royal London, like much of British life, is an illusion, a living museum of a civilisation that has largely vanished. Most of us know this, if we stop to think about it. But we continue to wish that we were still the country we once were. It hurts to have it rammed home, like this, that we are not. Even five years ago, no trained soldier would have done such a thing.

*************

Which word springs to mind when you look at this number plate, displayed on a Lamborghini in a London showroom?

Almost everyone I have shown it to says 'Heroin'. But the garage owners, H. R. Owen, say it refers to their name and offered no answer when I asked if it had ever occurred to them that some people might think it was a drug reference.

This sort of thing reinforces my view that we don't really disapprove of drugs any more.

******

Former MI5 chief Stella Rimington is exercised about Marxist advisers to Jeremy Corbyn, who in the 1980s wanted to destroy democracy.

No doubt. But did she not notice that Tony Blair himself was a student Trotskyist (a fact he's now finally admitted), Peter Mandelson was a Young Communist, Blair's Defence Secretary John Reid was an Old Communist, and four other Blair Cabinet Ministers have neither denied nor regretted reliable reports of Marxist pasts?

I'd guess there are at least a dozen more we don't know about. Did MI5?

Riddle of the shadowy assassins

The word 'conspiracy' makes people think of men in Guy Fawkes hats and cloaks, whispering theatrically in a dark tavern.

So it is easy to dismiss any suggestion that actions are privately planned as a 'conspiracy theory'. Most people will immediately feel embarrassed that they believed something so silly.

This is a mistake. People do meet privately so that they can co-operate in pursuing a shared aim without revealing their connections with each other. It is more effective if it does not look planned. In modern Britain this is called 'lunch', and it happens many times every day. Those involved wear ordinary suits and keep their voices down, but they do not whisper.

We know that Chancellor Philip Hammond has been lunching with George Osborne. I also suspect there have been other lunches involved in the current wave of attacks on Mr Hammond.

I don't have any special liking for Mr Hammond, rather the opposite, but I thought you might be interested to know that he has not suddenly become so unpopular by accident, or through telepathy.

By the way, a word to the former Chancellor Lord Lawson, a man for whom I do have great respect, and who no doubt decided to attack Mr Hammond without any prompting from anyone.

He should know better than to use terms such as 'sabotage' about the man who now holds the post he once occupied. It is a frantic, totalitarian expression – Stalin used to use it a lot.

And he should also remember the wretched period 30 years ago when he joined with Sir Geoffrey Howe to strong-arm Margaret Thatcher into the disastrous Exchange Rate Mechanism.

She was right, and he was wrong, it seems to me.

Such experiences should surely make those involved less sure of themselves, not more so. I find it harder and harder to be sure about how to handle the EU issue.

**********

Officialdom is still baffled by the Las Vegas mass murders. That’s because they’re only interested in standard explanations.

Almost all such killings are committed by people who have been using legal or illegal mind-altering drugs – eg ‘antidepressants’, steroids or cannabis.

And we know that the killer Stephen Paddock had been taking diazepam (whose side effects include rage and violence, especially if the person is an abuser of other drugs).

It really is time this connection was examined.

If you want to comment on Peter Hitchens, click on Comments and scroll down

Share this article:

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The powers that be want us to be frightened and timid in the face of the enemy, so that they can carry out totalitarian actions under the guise of counterterrorism without opposition.

In December 2016, they actually banned a political opposition group (National Action) and arrested anyone who was a member of this organization. Where were the warnings and recriminations from the press? I certainly couldn't find any. It is easy to get away with totalitarian acts when the people you deploy them against are idiots. And these people (National Action) are idiots to be sure and said stupid things, but banning and arresting their members simply for being members of a political organisation is a totalitarian act. To my knowledge these people did not plant bombs or commit murder - their crime is essentially guilt by association with idiots who talk nonsense. Here is what the Home Secretary had to say in justification of her totalitarian acts:

"National Action is a racist, anti-Semitic and homophobic organisation which stirs up hatred, glorifies violence and promotes a vile ideology, and I will not stand for it.

"It has absolutely no place in a Britain that works for everyone."

In other words, they were banned because Amber Rudd doesn't like what they stand for and wanted to eliminate a political opponent, not because they were a threat to the public.

It isn't far fetched to imagine a future Jeremy Corbyn government using similar language and the same arbitrary powers against it's political opponents in the Tory party or maybe UKIP, or the environmental 'extremists' in the Green party. The present generation of politicians do not appear to understand the necessity of limitations on the power of the state over the individual. They simply want unlimited power and unconditional consent to shape society in their image. The complete absence of foresight amongst these people is unbelievable. They are like children.

I think this latest incident in Nuneaton, in which a man with a sawn off shotgun is holding people hostage at a bowling ally, demonstrates just how useless the advice 'Run, hide, tell' is, in defending you against such attacks. These people have nowhere to run and hide. There's no need to tell anyone because at the slightest murmur of a car going close to a pavement or someone having a gun, it's immediately all over the news. Who are they supposed to tell once the event is happening - I suppose a quick text to David Davies would be necessary to get an expert negotiator in to talk him down? The truth is, once a terror attack is unfolding there is very little anyone can do to protect you, it's all about prevention, but I do support the police having more powers to use force against people carrying weapons. Once things for sure, I won't be relying on the May government or Jeremy Corbyn and his rabble to defend me against terrorism.

Paul Mealand.
I do not think anyone is suggesting that the Police cower on the sidelines .
The Police are expected to protect the citizens , motley or not ., the Police do so , often at risk to their own safety and survival , they are after all only human . What is being argued with is the attitude that the citizens are being urged to take , by authority when suddenly and unexpectedly they are in the middle of an incident , before any effective Police response arrives , they cannot be everywhere , at the right time can they ? The officer who bravely confronted the three men armed with knives and unknown to him at that instant , fake bomb vests , while he was armed with his baton and pepper spray , civilians did the same , at least one who confronted them was killed , fighting them , a brave man indeed .
Society should protect itself , through the Police and within limits , assisted by its citizens , although in extremis , the time to think it through " should I do something or not ?" may not be available . That jeweller chasing the robbers with an umbrella , recently on the news , may have thought after , "what was I thinking !?" to himself .

There we are then.When the bombs are going off and the bullets are flying in London Mr Hitchens and his motley band of citizens will march towards the perpetrators and put them to the sword while the police cower on the sidelines.We can then sleep safely in our beds.

I do, indeed, get your drift. Quite where the centre is these days is difficult to say. But there have always been some politicians that straddle the fence, due, perhaps, to a small streak of independent thinking; some have even crossed the floor, but not in recent years. Some, no doubt, find it tricky to find the centre line of their own party, let alone the line between parties. Others might even find it tricky to find the way home from the member's bar.

Alan .
I don`t think the them & us terminology can be applied to Labour or Conservative anymore , some Labourites are more Conservative than a Conservative where ever a bob or two is involved and similarly Some Conservatives are more Labour than a Labourite , you get my drift I hope .

In accusing me of being a supporter of the 'elite' - something of a handy catch all expression in my view - you appear to have forgotten that I voted Labour in the recent election (partly as a response to the other lot who, historical, are far more supportive of those with a bob or two, and also as a response to the calling of an election to suit their party).

That aside, have you actually written a manual of 'common sense and decency'? I gained the impression that having dropped the thought of forming your own political party under that banner you had backed off the idea.

As to blaming 'me and my pals' for the present outcome that, coming from a man that never voted in the referendum, is on the priceless side of rich!

Universal credit where you can earn and it tapers is better than the old system, but it is madness to think that giving H. B enefit straight to claimant, will not see people not pay rent and get in debt and have councils, housing associations, landlord in arrears. It was why they paid it straight to landlords before.
Never learn.

Alan, "I agree that a lack of planning by Brexiteers is now fairly obvious to all. It was, perhaps, more obvious to some at the time of the referendum than it was to others"

More self-perpetuating nonsense from my friend Alan. Planning by Brexiteers you say? Really? I thought Theresa May was a remainer, along with the majority of other hapless Westminster politicians who've stuttered and stalled over this crisis. No Alan, the only thing obvious at the time of the referendum was that people wanted out, but thanks to you and your pals it doesn't look like it's ever going to materialise. I also see the government's universal credit scheme is working a treat. If the objective of this policy was to make tens of thousands of people homeless then it looks like it's been a real winner. Another 'well planned' policy from people who have clearly not been reading their common sense and decency manual.

Ah yes, they can't help the arrogance often either. Used to be one motor in particular was the favoured one as well.
I guess with all these leasing vehicle contracts there's more choice!! Sadly with more cameras than actual traffic cars, who knows what is being missed in favour of a speeding fine!

I'd like to draw attention to you and PH to the BBC programme, "Inside out" East on the 16th, now available on I player. The one where Ipswich and drug gangs are highlighted.
Interested because Suffolk is my area, but gives a good picture of lots of more rural places becoming targets for the undesirables who travel to advance their criminality on the vulnerable.

Come now, Martin. When have I ever treated you in anything other than a civil manner.? I can't help it if your proclamations are often met with stony silence by others - not that I'm guilty of that. I do plead guilty to a charge of not taking a similar option, but when ones name is mentioned what else can one do?

However, and this may come as a surprise, Martin, I agree that a lack of planning by Brexiteers is now fairly obvious to all. It was, perhaps, more obvious to some at the time of the referendum than it was to others. Still, at least you, as a non-voter, can be spared any blame.

Mrs B .
*** not too bright , flashy drug dealer***
Mrs B you are spot on , where I live , a drug dealer , courier was apprehended in the course of his rounds , by an Officer who noticed the chap was not wearing a seat belt , whilst the Officer was informing him of this failing , the miscreant decided to become argumentative and instead of saying something like , " yes , Constable , I do apologise , it will not happen again " caused the Officer to look into this chap in greater detail than he otherwise would have done , for not wearing his seatbelt , cocaine , under the seat , later , fingerprints and details of other involved criminals were obtained and led to the capture of an otherwise unknown but established drug dealing ring , simply because an idiot thinks he is Al Capone and cannot keep his mouth shut when required . Not too bright indeed .

In today's great democratic society in UK " Run, Hide and Tell" is just another step below "Ignore, Hide and Say Nothing" which seems to be the preferred option for many/most - particularly those who wish to maintain employment status or long term career ambitions.

Close friend...? That's interesting Alan, I was trying to picture what it might be like to be your enemy? As for 'stunned silences' who knows, I doubt that most of the contributors to this blog come here to be silent but I know that remainers like 'Alan' are rather good at seeing into the mind's of men, or so they say. Nevertheless, surely it isn't beyond the bounds of belief, even for a doubting Thomas such as yourself, that any sensible person in charge of these discussions could have progressed them to a greater extent than the shambles we've seen thus far. But I suppose, like any puppet of the establishment, you prefer to attack the person who makes perfectly justifiable criticisms of your fellow elites.

I'm sure I wouldn't want a number plate that could be read as Heroin.
Could be construed to be a not to bright, but flashy drug dealer I suppose.
In that case worth a stop, you never know these days!!!

That's if there are any patrolling policemen or traffic cars. Police motorbikes are not a common sight now where I live either......

65 high profile cases of mass shootings/murder have been committed by individuals under the influence of these drugs, *yet there has never been a federal investigation into the link between seemingly senseless acts of violence and the use of mind-altering psychotropic drugs*.”

The article refers Stephen Paddock’s rampage

”Yet amidst the speculation immediately following the shooting, *none* of the journalists attending the live broadcast press conference posed the question:
Was there any indication the shooter was under the influence of a mind-altering prescribed drug?

Considering that mainstream media *rarely* pursues this line of questioning, that law enforcement isn’t required to reveal it, and that the psychiatric-pharmaceutical industry certainly doesn’t want to address it, the task often falls to individual journalists to dig up relevant facts.”

”Furthermore according to the FDA’s MedWatch reporting system for drug side effects, over a 10-year period, the FDA received 1,531 cases of homicidal ideation/homicide attributed to psychiatric drugs, 40% of which were reported by medical professionals. The FDA admits that only 1-10% of drug side effects are ever reported to MedWatch, so taking a medium range of 5%, the number could easily be 30,620 cases of homicidal ideation/homicide attributed to psychiatric drugs.

Regarding the concept that psychiatric drugs could not have been a contributing factor in a case where the perpetrator was involved in extensive planning or preparations, we look to the definition of “homicidal ideation,” a similar concept to the “suicidal ideation” black box warning on antidepressant drugs:

Homicidal ideation: “Thoughts about homicide. They may range from globally aggressive thoughts to a specific *lethal plan* with available means to carry it out.” — Emergency Psychiatry journal”

”There have been 65 high profile acts of senseless violence, including mass school shootings, mass stabbings, and even the intentional crashing of a commercial airplane, committed by individuals taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs, resulting in 357 dead and 336 wounded.

Drug proponents argue that there are thousands of shootings and acts of violence that have not been correlated to psychiatric drugs, and that is exactly the point. They have neither been confirmed nor refuted to have been connected to psychiatric drugs, as *law enforcement is not required to investigate or report on prescribed drugs linked to violence*, and media *rarely* pose the question.”

”The New York State Senate recognized the lack of reporting correlating mind-altering psychiatric drugs to both suicide and violence as far back as 2000…”
(October 9, 2017. Emphases added)

The homeless man seems to have had a dysfunctional past with incest in family and was seen as a "hindrance" when younger.
He already had a cannabis habit, but had seemingly sorted himself, after the family that decided to help him, found him accommodation, the father gave him a job.
His drug use was still a problem, no longer employable and 3 days before the homeless man killed the mum and son, while the father took the dog out, they had cancelled his mobile phone contract, they had paid for him.
Long term cannabis use and a great deal of dysfunction..once again. We need a debate and I support PH.
Phones are status and link him to others....anger rising?

Oh, please don't... I'm still recovering from my close friend's earlier statement how he would have sorted out the great Brexit debate long ago were he in charge! To which the response to-date appears to be a stunned silence...

On the final thought on the "EU issue". I didn't vote in the EURef...not I am ashamed to say for some ideological reason, rather because I didn't trust Cameron and his reasons for calling it. It was obvious to me it had nothing to do with the UK and everything to do with the Tory party.

Fast forward to the mess the week after and like our host I began to think that an EU IN/OUT GE with set out manifestos where those who break it stay to fix it would have been a better option.

That gets to my point. Not that it would happen but I feel (a bit naively) either the government must push for a "no deal" brexit immediately (not wait until 2019) and if it fails hold a GE on a "no deal" platform or abandon this damaging limbo and scrap Brexit and stand in a GE on that instead. This would give the electorate a clear choice.

Whatever way one voted nobody voted for a fudge. I appreciate as someone who sat on the fence that might sound a bit rich.

That doesn't strike you as sinister????!!!! Also Maas is in charge of the ministry of justice and oversaw the imprisonment of an 88 year old Grandmother. Now maybe what she said is disagreeable but allowing an octogenarian to go to jail...for YEARS for something she said??? Really???? As for the arguments about Kahane, I don't care what group she belongs to because I'm not a racist. If anyone starts extending their powers (as a journalist with influence due to her friendship with Angela Merkel) and expanding on curbing people's right to speak they are a danger to liberty. This is done under the guise of an imaginary "resurgence of ultra-rightwing nationalism" which is simply a lie. There is no "faaaahhhhhr right" that presents a threat to the safety of Germans. However I notice you've excluded the bombings, rapes, sexual assaults, stabbings, suicide bombings and the axe attacks which have occurred, and the majority are attributable to Merkel's migrant policy. I would say the majority of them aren't "terrorists" but criminals who should be deported. The label "terrorist" is a useful tool to take away decent law abiding people's rights for the actions of drugged up and culturally ignorant criminals who should be deported. It's a useful way of taking the focus of the responsibility of the Govt to deport criminals. Have you noticed the numbers who are still in Germany? The "failed asylum seekers" like the Tunisian who drove his lorry into German shoppers at a Christmas market?
There are no "dodgy websites" that I visit but you have a very selective view of what has gone on in Germany in the last two years.
Maas has huge powers and just remember he has abused his powers on numerous occasions such as sending federal police into regional areas to arrest criminals who attacked a migrant centre. He didn't do too much about the far left thugs who burned Hamburg to the ground and you again ignored this. Maas has many friends who were involved in "groups" and most of the German establishment do. Sigmar Gabriel is one of these people who sees Nazis everywhere but loathes anyone who is even moderately Conservative and would happily imprison his opponents....or far worse.
As for the AfD being in Government, that's a valid statement. They have 94 seats in the Bundestag and they are the third biggest political party in Germany and no, Mr Bunker they're not a "faaaaaaaaahr right" party. As for the Nazi tyranny angle, it's getting tedious and as you people often say "It's 2017". So it's time to forget the past and move on because people aren't fooled by moral arguments with no facts and references to the past and out of context statements about "stopping fascism". Totalitarianism now. That's something people fear and it's mostly coming from our Governments.

I too would hope that I would confront a terrorist - and believe I would if I thought children were in imminent threat and had no chance of escape. However if there weren't any in such a position, the thought of leaving my children without a father is terrifying and I fear would be the overwhelming factor: It would be a broken family even if nobly broken.

" It is more effective if it does not look planned. In modern Britain this is called 'lunch', and it happens many times every day."

You are absolutely right, when the banking crisis hit the major players met up in that shadowy, top secret location known as McDonalds to discuss the countries future leap into the abyss. There is certainly no such thing as a free lunch for many people in this country but where ardent remainers like Phillips Hammond and George Osbourne are concerned, you can bet that we'll be picking up the tab.

"But how miserable that the motto we are now being advised to adopt, when under terrorist attack, is the ghastly police advice of 'Run! Hide! Tell!'

Hang on a tick Mr. Hitchens. Weren't you the one telling me that if you were in close proximity to the Barcelona attackers, in which the police were not supposed to shoot, that you would run off? Surely this is your own motto! I think the only stampedes I'm worried about are the ones on my train to work every morning.

"This is a mistake. People do meet privately so that they can co-operate in pursuing a shared aim without revealing their connections with each other"

Indeed they do, they are called the liberal elite. If you ask Alan Thomas, he should be able to fill you in on the details of their next rendezvous.

JohnMack - thanks for that kind response, but I was only trying to help! I've lived in Germany for the past fifty-eight years so, although it was very thoughtful of you to enlighten me about the situation here, it wasn't really necessary.

You may not know this, but Heiko Maas, a democratic politician and Social Democratic Justice Minister, is not "in charge" here, as you claim. You quote him. This is what he actually said:

"Wir kümmern uns auch weiter um die Interessen auch derjenigen Menschen, die da stehen und ‚Volksverräter‘ schreien und gar nicht wissen was mit ihnen geschieht." -- Which I translate as: We shall continue to represent the interests of those people too who are standing here and shouting Traitor and who are not aware of how they are being used."

So you see, there was nothing "sinister" about that quote as you appear to intimate. On the contrary in fact. You have obviously been hoodwinked by some dodgy websites.

The biggest danger, not only in Germany but in Europe today, is a resurgence of ultra-rightwing nationalism, and (although it is perhaps not necessary) I'd like to remind you that that was precisely what the "grandfather-generation" of Britain fought against in order to save the country from the spread of Nazi tyranny.

You cite the case of a former Stasi informant (it ceased to exist almost thirty years ago). As far as I know she is Jewish and according to Wiki is active in an organization working "against xenophobia, antisemitism and right-wing extremism" - which may explain your comment.

Finally, you astonishingly tell me the AfD "are now in government" which makes me wonder how much you really know about Germany apart from the fake-news you get from dodgy websites. If you really want genuine information about Germany then try using serious sources of information, or better still, come here and see for yourself.

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the moderator has approved them. They must not exceed 500 words. Web links cannot be accepted, and may mean your whole comment is not published.